Cycling UK Forum

bigphil wrote:The Times is turning into the Daily Mail for those who think themselves grown ups.

Hasn't it always been so?

rower40 wrote:D'oh! Force of Habit meant that I bought the Times this morning. Can anyone suggest a way of remembering what a bunch of idiots write therein, BEFORE I hand over money to my Newsagent?

Then again, are any of the National Newspapers any better/different?

I used to quite enjoy The Independent (especially for Robert Fisk's reports from the Middle East). Then Paul "SafeSpeed" Smith got a full column in the motoring section to spout his nonsense and I went off it. Oh well, now that there's no chance of that happening again, perhaps it's time to give the Indy another chance? They do have a cycling column now and again, don't they?

The Guardian has a weekly cycling column in G2 written by (not everyone's favourite) Matt Seaton. Personally, I find it entertaining, and generally like the Guardian's outlook.

I couldn't help myself. I just had to buy the Times when it had a give-away DangerMouse DVD. What choice did I have?

The PCC's (predictable) response re: the Parris article:

As you may know, the PCC received a large number of complaints about the Matthew Parris article about which you recently raised concerns.
The Commission has now assessed whether the article in question, headlined “What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated”, breached the terms of the Code of Practice (which can be seen on our website at www.pcc.org.uk). While it acknowledged the deep concerns that many readers had about the piece, the Commission’s decision was that there was no breach of the Code and a full explanation is enclosed. Please let me know if you would like further clarification of the reasons for the Commission’s decision.
Although the Commission has come to this view, we will be writing to the editor of the Times to let him know the scale of complaints we received about Mr Parris’ column.
If you are dissatisfied with the way in which your complaint has been handled - as opposed to the Commission’s decision itself - you should write within one month to the independent Charter Commissioner, whose details can be found on our website.
Thank you for taking this matter up with us.

Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your views on freedom of speech) this didn't contravene any specifics of the code of practice.

However they did make it clear that the legalities of the article where not evaluated (and would have to be addressed to a different body presumably the police or crown prosecution service). Again the same freedom of speech issues stand.

However, hopefully the Times and other media have learned something about the distastefulness/offensefness of this type of article.

I'm a strong freedom of speech man and I tend to think that the heavy-handed restrictions on the press in this country (notably the law of defamation - libel) merely serve to shelter the activities of dodgy politicians and similar.

IMO so-called watchdogs such as the PCC (which is even more toothless than most) just give a bit of flimsy respectability to the whitewash industry. Is there anything which does contravene their guidelines?

This sort of guff normally comes from the usual suspects and I always think they are best ignored as protesting just adds to their controversy value.

I was surprised to read this nasty, squalid piece from somebody like Parris who sets himself up as a very sensitive, understanding sort of chap. I fancy he will have been personally hurt by the response - especially as he will have had a lot more nasty stuff under plain wrappers than people are prepared to put their name to in a public forum.

Parris apologised and fair enough. What got me was the hack who subsequently covered the issue in the paper's 'Feedback' column and suggested that all the protesting was from the 'cycling lobby' as though everybody had got their heads together and decided to be outraged.

It is indicative of modern newspaper publishing methods that nobody at The Times recognised that this was a contemptible piece, humour or no humour, before it was published. In the past, The Times has portrayed itself as something special.

In the meantime, if any fool follows Parris's advice, I hope anyone with knowledge will press the police to investigate Parris for incitement or similar.